Stereophile 2023 recommended gear list

[fordiebianco]

Just had a look at the 2023 recommended gear list on stereophile.com, and it appears if the item doesn't cost less than my car, it won't make the highest recommendation grade. It's quite sad that they are appealing mainly to the 'more money than sense' customer. Thank god for ASR.

 

[Rednaxela]

Good to see Topping DM7 and WiiM Mini included.

 

[fpitas]

Nice to see Benchmark AHB2 made the list. It sticks out as one of the few amps appropriately priced, instead of wildly exaggerated.

 

[holdingpants01]

but at least there are D&D 8C in the speaker category

 

[fpitas]

Textural suppleness. What an age we live in

 

[dweeeeb2]

Textural suppleness. What an age we live in

"...that the previous gold cable lacked" Bloody hell how much was the gold cable and it still couldn't get it right?!

 

[fpitas]

"...that the previous gold cable lacked" Bloody hell how much was the gold cable and it still couldn't get it right?!

It's a tough thing to get, textural suppleness. I can only imagine the intensive engineering that went into it.

 

[Soria Moria]

They have a big section dedicated to the differences in sound between the various classes of amplifiers:

Class A Best attainable sound for a component of its kind, almost without practical considerations; "the least musical compromise." A Class A system is one for which you don't have to make a leap of faith to believe that you're hearing the real thing. When SACD and hi-rez files became available, we introduced a new Class, A+, for the best performance in those digital categories. Class A now represents the best that can be obtained from the conventional 16/44.1 CD medium. We also created Class A+ categories for turntables and phono preamps, to recognize the achievements of the Continuum Caliburn and Boulder 2008, respectively.

Class B The next best thing to the very best sound reproduction; Class B components generally cost less than those in Class A, but most Class B components are still quite expensive.

Class C Somewhat lower-fi sound, but far more musically natural than average home-component high fidelity; products in this class are of high quality but still affordable.

Class D Satisfying musical sound, but these components are either of significantly lower fidelity than the best available, or exhibit major compromises in performance—limited dynamic range, for example. Bear in mind that appearance in Class D still means that we recommend this product—it's possible to put together a musically satisfying system exclusively from Class D components.

 

[fpitas]

They have a big section dedicated to the differences in sound between the various classes of amplifiers:

Class A Best attainable sound for a component of its kind, almost without practical considerations; "the least musical compromise." A Class A system is one for which you don't have to make a leap of faith to believe that you're hearing the real thing. When SACD and hi-rez files became available, we introduced a new Class, A+, for the best performance in those digital categories. Class A now represents the best that can be obtained from the conventional 16/44.1 CD medium. We also created Class A+ categories for turntables and phono preamps, to recognize the achievements of the Continuum Caliburn and Boulder 2008, respectively.

Class B The next best thing to the very best sound reproduction; Class B components generally cost less than those in Class A, but most Class B components are still quite expensive.

Class C Somewhat lower-fi sound, but far more musically natural than average home-component high fidelity; products in this class are of high quality but still affordable.

Class D Satisfying musical sound, but these components are either of significantly lower fidelity than the best available, or exhibit major compromises in performance—limited dynamic range, for example. Bear in mind that appearance in Class D still means that we recommend this product—it's possible to put together a musically satisfying system exclusively from Class D components.

I *think* those are their own goofy classes, with no relationship to the electrical class. But who knows. In any event I bet class D is reasonably priced, and therefore inferior.

 

[Gorgonzola]

Just had a look at the 2023 recommended gear list on stereophile.com, and it appears if the item doesn't cost less than my car, it won't make the highest recommendation grade. It's quite sad that they are appealing mainly to the 'more money than sense' customer. Thank god for ASR.

Thanks for this link ... without it I'd be none the wiser.

Stereophile has always paid slavish tribute to mega-expensive offering with condescending inclusion of the odd moderate and even budget component, often at 'B' or 'C' levels. Not a whole lot has changed in the regard but it is gratifying to see, e.g. Topping's D90 Pre90 preamp included with a 'A' rating.

Indeed I suspect that "pressure" from ASR is forcing out a bit of the condescension of those lower-price inclusions.

 

[Soria Moria]

I *think* those are their own goofy classes, with no relationship to the electrical class. But who knows. In any event I bet class D is reasonably priced, and therefore inferior.

Oh, you’re probably right. I misunderstood. Still a load of silly though.

 

[fpitas]

Indeed I suspect that "pressure" from ASR is forcing out a bit of the condescension of those lower-price inclusions.

Amir never hears textural suppleness, though. We have a long ways to go.

 

[Mart68]

Class A When SACD and hi-rez files became available, we introduced a new Class, A+, for the best performance in those digital categories.

Muppets.

 

[fpitas]

Muppets.

It's like the stuff at Best Buy, Digital Ready

 

[Mart68]

I *think* those are their own goofy classes, with no relationship to the electrical class. But who knows. In any event I bet class D is reasonably priced, and therefore inferior.

yes they are their review rankings and nowt to do with amplifier class although it is confusing for no good reason.

The rankings are based on the amount of textural suppleness. Probably.

 

[fpitas]

The rankings are based on the amount of textural suppleness.

That's the engineering approach.

 

[Mart68]

That's the engineering approach.

indeed, just a shame that it seems to cost forty thousand dollars per component in order to get it. Still, we can dream.

 

[JayGilb]

It's a tough thing to get, textural suppleness. I can only imagine the intensive engineering that went into it.

 

[rdenney]

That's the engineering approach.

The suppleness is in the use of unmeasurable adjectives that John must use when he evaluates something on the bench that the regular reviewer emoted all over but that turned in low-fidelity measurements.

And you do have to admire it. I'm not unused to defending foolishness creatively so as to assuage (or avoid) injured pride, but I'd have never come up with "textural suppleness".

Rick "engineer response: yeah, whatever" Denney

 

[fpitas]

he evaluates something on the bench that the regular reviewer emoted all over but that turned in low-fidelity measurements.

Yes, that must be very awkward.